9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of by way of this common order. 2. Facts in brief, the assessee is an individual and is engaged in the business of clearing and letting out the property on leave and license basis after furnishing the same as per the requirement of the individual lessee. The assessee filed the return of income claiming the income from letting out as business income. The Assessing Officer in his order passed u/s. 143(3) held that income derived by the assessee from letting out the property, is to be assessed under the head income from house property and not as business income. He also computed annual let out value of the premises by including notional interest on interest free security deposit received by the assessee under leave and license agreement enter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... perty'. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee has fairly submitted that the identical issues had com before the "A" Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No. 7510/Mum/2005 dated 22.1.2010 for A.Y. 2002-03 and issue was decided against the assessee by following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shambhu Investments reported in 263 ITR 143(SC). Similarly ground to assess the income under the head 'income from other sources' and the ground claiming deprecation was also decided against the assessee. Respectfully following the Co-ordinate Bench order, we dismiss first three grounds raised in this appeal. 6. Ground No. 4 is on the levy of interest u/s. 234B and 234C. The same is mandatory and consequential in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... we hold that the annual value (also referred to as municipal valuation/ rateable value) adopted by the municipal authorities in respect of the property at ₹ 27,50,835 should be the determining factor for applying the provisions of Sec.23(1)(a) of the Act. Since the rent received by the Assessee was more than the sum for which the property might reasonably be expected to let from year to year, the actual rent received should be the annual value of the property u/s.23(1)(b) of the Act. Notional interest on interest free security deposit/rent received in advance should not be added to the same in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of J.K.Investors (Bombay) Ltd. (supra). We hold accordingly. The appeal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r sources' and whether the assessee is entitled to claim of depreciation. Consistent with the view taken by us in earlier appeals, we follow the Co-ordinate Bench order and dismiss ground No. 1,2&3 of the assessee. 20. Ground No. 4 is on the issue of allowability of maintenance charges in respect of flat. 21. Mr. Yogesh Thar, did not press this ground for the reason that the amount involved is small. In view of the above submission, we dismiss this ground as not pressed in view of the smallness of the amount. 22. Ground No. 5&6 are on the levy of interest u/s. 234B & 234D. As levy of interest is mandatory and consequential, we dismiss these grounds. 23. Ground No. 7&8 are also dismissed as they are general in nature. 24. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
